A woman's instinct would never tell them to bang anybody regardless of their looks. They do not want to spend 9 months being pregnant with somebody's child if they do not at least look like they have good genes. Any gene that made a woman attracted to men who did not look strong, would have been eliminated a long time ago.

And animals that have to spend any sort of resource on either bearing a child or raising it will not bang regardless of looks. Differences between one mate and another in the animal kingdom may seem minuscule or unobservable to you, but within that species they would have an acute sense of what makes a good mate.

Human psychology is more complicated than this. I've had plenty of one night stands, I've dated women who genuinely had no interest in long-term relationships much less children. Have you really never known a woman that just wanted to have good sex?

Human psychology is more complicated than this. I've had plenty of one night stands, I've dated women who genuinely had no interest in long-term relationships much less children. Have you really never known a woman that just wanted to have good sex?

They still use the same criteria whether they consciously intend to replicate or not.

In fact, there are still many tribes around the world that are totally unaware that sex is the cause of women becoming pregnant. Yet these women will still be attracted to men who will be advantageous to reproduce with.

A woman's instinct would never tell them to bang anybody regardless of their looks. They do not want to spend 9 months being pregnant with somebody's child if they do not at least look like they have good genes. Any gene that made a woman attracted to men who did not look strong, would have been eliminated a long time ago.

And animals that have to spend any sort of resource on either bearing a child or raising it will not bang regardless of looks. Differences between one mate and another in the animal kingdom may seem minuscule or unobservable to you, but within that species they would have an acute sense of what makes a good mate.

I will respond with a series of pics that will rest this issue:

Yes you are right...he looks both strong and virile.

What you are saying is absolutely retarded...honestly and I don't mean any offense by that...your logic is fine and I have no problem with it, but those genes you speak (type) of, are still present and women still marry/attracted to men that are neither financially or physically strong in today's time.

I started off in jest, but you took me seriously I think. You are just wrong here though. Instinctually, women are supposed to reproduce. That is it...attraction plays a role, but not as major of one as you are thinking. If society and its influence weren't around, women would be the ones having multiple sex partners in the same night/at the same time to reproduce. That is what their bodies were built for. They can take on many sex partners and the best seed wins. That is how it is set up. Not they choose the best seed first. You are flawed there. Your evolutionary logic needs some restructuring.

It's because sleeping with an absolute stranger makes more sense for a guy than it does for a woman.

If a guy ****s some random chick and never sees here again, he's hardly deposited a large investment as it's the woman who would get stuck with a kid. All he knows is that he's trying to spread his genes to as many women as possible.

A woman is going to want a guy who can protect her and the kid, so if someone isn't going to at least act like he's going to stick around, has good genes and be good at looking after her and the kid then she probably won't want to get knocked up. Obviously we have condoms now, but it's still deeply ingrained in their natural instinct.

What was I getting at.... oh yeah. Girls are different to guys. Pretty ******* smart, eh?

Quote:

Originally Posted by giga191

A woman's instinct would never tell them to bang anybody regardless of their looks. They do not want to spend 9 months being pregnant with somebody's child if they do not at least look like they have good genes. Any gene that made a woman attracted to men who did not look strong, would have been eliminated a long time ago.

And animals that have to spend any sort of resource on either bearing a child or raising it will not bang regardless of looks. Differences between one mate and another in the animal kingdom may seem minuscule or unobservable to you, but within that species they would have an acute sense of what makes a good mate.

Lies. I say my looks have gotten me into more girls pants than any other attribute I possess. And I have had my share of one nighters, random hook-ups and **** buddies. If women choose to **** guys based on the guy's ability to protect and provide for them it makes no sense for her to pick a short, thin guy with small bone structure and limited means. Yet that describes me and all the guys I know who have had the best luck with women sexually. How about being: cute, funny, romantic (w/o gifts), sexy, witty etc none of these would have value then in getting a girl to have sex with you, but they do. It is not all survival value and girls will **** good looking guys for no more than their looks, trust me.

__________________

If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. ~ Thomas Jefferson

Lies. I say my looks have gotten me into more girls pants than any other attribute I possess. And I have had my share of one nighters, random hook-ups and **** buddies. If women choose to **** guys based on the guy's ability to protect and provide for them it makes no sense for her to pick a short, thin guy with small bone structure and limited means. Yet that describes me and all the guys I know who have had the best luck with women sexually. How about being: cute, funny, romantic (w/o gifts), sexy, witty etc none of these would have value then in getting a girl to have sex with you, but they do. It is not all survival value and girls will **** good looking guys for no more than their looks, trust me.

i think the person posting these "lies" is failing to distinguish the difference between a sexual encounter and a woman seeking a mate (for life). But in any case, it is flawed logic.

i would have never thought this thread would have gotten into a discussion involving evolutionary theory as it pertains to women's sex drives.

with a sig like that...it is no wonder. That = panty dropping game to the max.

Oh, no doubt. I can't even wear them when I get onto MMAF because I know they'll come off once I'm in Holy Rob's virtual presence.

I think it would be fair to say that the more evolved parts of the brain look at smart, funny, compassionate, and the brain stem says I WANNA TAP DAT N HAVE BABIEZ. Frequently, there is a battle royale between the two.